On Thursday 26 January 2006 03:40, Sven Köhler wrote:
> >> Seems like a bit ranting to me. Why do you use unsupported installation
> >> method if you want it simple?
> >
> > I don't know about Sven, but the reasons I prefer the "unsupported"
> > installation method is all outlined here:
>
> I have no clue, what "bootstrap.sh" is for anymore.
> For me, Installing gentoo was always like this:

Ok, let me remind all. Stage 1 is a minimal system that is mainly built 
statically with the sole purpose of being suitable to build a working system 
from. It contains a cripled compiler as one of the first things it does is 
make a proper one. After that the original compiler should be gone. While 
some recompiling is needed because of circular dependencies between libc and 
gcc, this should be no issue. After the bootstrap has been run, one should 
have a proper minimal building environment that should be able to build all 
packages (except for some assumptions on available tools). This minimal 
environment is called stage 2.

Stage 2 should not contain any trace of the bootstrap compiler. If the 
bootstrap compiler was a 3.3.x version and the final one a 3.4.x version, 
there should be no 3.3.x version remaining. Be aware though that if the 
profile does not offer a 3.4 compiler the final will be a 3.3 compiler. If 
desired the profile should be changed before running bootstrap.sh

Because many ebuilds make assumptions about the environment, and because a 
stage 2 will not boot by itself, a number of utilities deemed essential must 
be installed. Those are part of system. The main ingredient being baselayout 
with it's dependencies. Baselayout is what takes care of booting your system 
into a working order.

> Mike is telling me, that the 2006.0 tarballs will contain gcc-3.4.
> Then he's telling me, that the problem, that Im trying to point out, is
> going to vanish with the release of the 2006.0 tarballs. Well, yes,
> until the next gcc-slot becomes stable. So the problem is not fixed,
> just moved to the future again.

If a stage1 install does not remove a 3.3.x bootstrap compiler when a 3.4 is 
used as the main, that is a bug in the bootstrap script. As such it should be 
fixed. Stage 3 installs just dump a fully functional system, so as such one 
should then just take the steps from the handbook that make it bootable. 
After that the gcc-upgrade guide can be followed, except that world update is 
not really needed, and that world normally also includes system such that 
emerge -e system && emerge -e world is extraneous.

> Pretty much work for a beginnner!
> And there's pretty much of experience needed.

It's easier than going from stage 1. It is possible to skip all the unneeded 
compiling, but it's easy to fuck up, and very hard to explain. That's why 
stage 1 is discouraged.

> Actually, the moment when there's an upgrade to glibc and gcc, than
> there's no advantage in taking a stage3 - the whole "upgrading the
> stage3"-thing will take as long as using a stage1.
> Why? because i have to upgrade glibc and gcc - and that is basically
> what bootstrap.sh does too.

Not really, bootstrap.sh does things in a specific order to take care of 
cyclic dependencies that fail because stage1 is a minimal ( say crippled ) 
environment. But indeed you're better off with a stage3 that is based on a 
current glibc and gcc version. Minor version numbers don't matter much 
though.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net